Transcending Race, Class, and Ideology Through Interest Convergence

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Transcending Race, Class, and Ideology Through Interest Convergence Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2005 Shall We Overcome? Transcending Race, Class, and Ideology Through Interest Convergence Sheryll Cashin Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1693 79 St. John's L. Rev. 253-291 This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Law and Race Commons ARTICLES SHALL WE OVERCOME? TRANSCENDING RACE, CLASS, AND IDEOLOGY THROUGH INTEREST CONVERGENCE SHERYLL D. CASHIN' "[W]e believe that political relations are based on self-interest: benefits to be gained and losses to be avoided. For the most part, man's politics is determined by his evaluation of material good and evil. Politics results from a conflict of interests, not of consciences." 1 "The interest of blacks in achieving racial equality will be accommodated only when it converges with the interests of whites. "2 In the past year we have celebrated a number of civil rights milestones: the fiftieth anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education;3 the fortieth anniversaries of the March on I Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center. I would like to thank Nina Pillard and James Forman for very helpful comments on an early draft of this paper and for the many constructive and thoughtful comments offered by law faculty who attended my presentation of this paper at both St. John's University School of Law and at Georgetown University. I would also like to thank my Research Assistant, Zhubin Parang, for his invaluable assistance. STOKELY CARMICHAEL & CHARLES V. HAMILTON, BLACK POWER: THE POLITICS OF LIBERATION IN AMERICA 75 (1967). 2 Derrick A. Bell, Jr., Brown v. Board of Education and the Interest-Convergence Dilemma, 93 HARV. L. REV. 518, 523 (1980). ' 347 U.S. 483 (1954). ST. JOHN'S LAWREVIEW [Vol. 79:253 Washington and of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 4 Collectively our nation now venerates our most progressive, socially transforming legal edicts, even as we accept, or ignore, persistent racial inequality. Much has been written about the limits and modern meaning of Brown.5 Elsewhere I have argued that we have failed to live up to the integrationist vision that animated Brown and the civil rights movement, primarily because our neighborhoods remain largely segregated by race and class.6 In this Article, I celebrate the coalition politics that made the civil rights revolution possible with a view toward understanding how and why coalition politics of the progressive kind seem to be stymied today. I argue that the thesis of interest convergence advanced by Professor Derrick Bell, while pessimistic in its outlook, offers a key insight into human nature and American race relations 4 Pub. L. No. 88-352, 78 Stat. 241. 5 See, e.g., DERRICK BELL, SILENT COVENANTS: BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION AND THE UNFULFILLED HOPES FOR RACIAL REFORM 6-7 (2004) (arguing, inter alia, that the Supreme Court's declaration that separate facilities were inherently unequal legitimated current unequal arrangements by suggesting that those who remain poor and disempowered had simply failed to take advantage of their definitially equal status); MICHAEL J. KLARMAN, FROM JIM CROW TO CIVIL RIGHTS: THE SUPREME COURT AND THE STRUGGLE FOR RACIAL EQUALITY 441-42, 467-68 (2004); CHARLES J. OGLETREE, JR., ALL DELIBERATE SPEED: REFLECTIONS ON THE FIRST HALF CENTURY OF BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION 311 (2004) (arguing that the unfulfilled legacy of Brown reflects our nation's limited commitment to racial justice); MARK V. TUSHNET, BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION: THE BATTLE FOR INTEGRATION 129-33 (1995) (arguing that Brown's principal effect was not to integrate schools, but to motivate and strengthen the burgeoning civil rights movement); Lani Guinier, From Racial Liberalism to Racial Literacy: Brown v. Board of Education and the Interest-Divergence Dilemma, 91 J. OF AM. HIST. 92, 95-96 (2004) (arguing that Brown "redefine[d] equality, not as a fair and just distribution of resources, but as the absence of formal, legal barriers that separated the races" and "convinced working-class whites that their interests lay in white solidarity rather than collective cross-racial mobilization"); Gary Orfield & Chungmei Lee, Brown at 50: King's Dream or Plessy's Nightmare? (Harvard University/Civil Rights Project, Cambridge, M.A.), Jan. 2004, at 40 (arguing, inter alia, that school segregation has been increasing since the 1990s and that a renewed commitment to integration is needed, which would involve appointing Brown- friendly judges and civil rights enforcement officials, reviving federal aid programs that confront race relations issues, and providing financial incentives to white suburban schools that accept segregated minority students), available at http://www.civilrightsproject.harvard.edu/research/resegO4/brown50.pdf; Mark Tushnet, Public Law Litigation and the Ambiguities of Brown, 61 FORDHAM L. REV. 23, 25, 27-28 (1992) (arguing that Brown's "all deliberate speed" standard, authored by Justice Frankfurter in an attempt to limit the expansive reach of Brown, ironically greatly expanded the Court's ability to impact social policy). 6 See generally SHERYLL CASHIN, THE FAILURES OF INTEGRATION: HOW RACE AND CLASS ARE UNDERMINING THE AMERICAN DREAM (2004). 2005] SHALL WE OVERCOME? that can and should be harnessed in order to build the sustainable multiracial coalitions that will be necessary if we are to close existing gaps of racial inequality. The civil rights movement ultimately succeeded not only because it had moral force, but also because a powerful, well-organized grassroots effort altered the understanding of a voting majority in Congress as to what was in their enlightened self-interest and in the interest of the nation. I explore below the possibilities for progressives to recapture majoritarian politics based upon a convergence of interests among communities of color, working class, and progressive whites. A key challenge, as Bell and others suggest, is whether racial ideology often, but not exclusively, harbored by whites can be transcended by engaging7 seemingly disparate groups in the language of self-interest. In Part I of this Article, I explore the coalition politics that made it possible to enact the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the coalition theory that animated this movement. I then discuss Bell's interest-convergence thesis and related arguments offered by other scholars and social advocates who are skeptical about the possibilities for mutual cooperation between blacks and other groups, particularly whites. I argue that it is unsurprising that any social group in power would oppose policies that they perceive to be contrary to their self-interest, even in the face of moral counterweights. Acknowledging this dark aspect of human nature, I nevertheless conclude that broad coalitions for progressive change are theoretically possible when common interests, or a convergence of perceived self-interest, can be established. In Part II, I test this premise in the modern context, examining the challenges to progressive coalition building presented by our nation's new and increasing racial complexity. I canvass recent political science literature regarding the theory and practice of multiracial coalition building, exploring how inter-group relational dynamics have changed since the civil rights movement. I see both promise and peril in demographic ' Professor Bell might use "racism" where I use "racial ideology." See DERRICK BELL, FACES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE WELL: THE PERMANENCE OF RACISM 13, 198-99 (1992). By "racial ideology," I mean any type of commitment or belief of a racial nature, conscious or unconscious, that might inhibit someone from joining a coalition that otherwise is advancing public policies that are in that person's rational self- interest. See discussion infra Part II.A.2 for a more detailed analysis. ST. JOHN'S LAW REVIEW [Vol. 79:253 trends. With rising diversity, it is increasingly unlikely that a single racial group can succeed independently in pursuing a progressive policy agenda. In racially diverse contexts, coalition building is the only route to meaningful political power. Diversity, then, can be a source of power if properly harnessed. The risk with ever-complex diversity, however, is that the transaction costs of inter-group negotiations and the possibility for conflict rise with each new group or interest that must be incorporated. There is an especially heightened risk that racial and ethnic minorities will perceive their relative interests in zero-sum terms. More importantly, the chief obstacle to multiracial coalition building appears to be the persistence of negative racial stereotypes, especially those held about African Americans. I offer hopeful examples of successful multiracial coalitions that have transcended potential race and class conflicts and, therefore, altered the status quo in a policymaking context. Building off these examples, I argue that the best route to creating a more enlightened understanding of how the interests of seemingly strange bedfellows do converge is through leadership and grassroots organization fueled by the artful dissemination of empirical data. This is labor-intensive and challenging, but necessary, work. While the path of least resistance is to work solely within single issue or single identity constituencies, progressives will be increasingly disempowered without alliances and relationships across boundaries of race and class. I. THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT AND INTEREST GROUP CONVERGENCE The Civil Rights Act of 1964 became law on July 2 of that year, after fifty-seven days of debate.8 Among the other iconic events of that hot summer were the murders of civil rights workers Schwerner, Goodman, and Chaney in Mississippi, and the Birmingham church bombing that killed four little girls.9 A 8 See Linda Parker, Civil Rights Act of 1964 Remains a Lofty Pursuit Still in Progress, DETROIT NEWS, July 29, 2004, at A17; They Did Go On, WASH.
Recommended publications
  • The Honorable Harold H. Greene
    THE HONORABLE HAROLD H. GREENE U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Oral History Project The Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit Oral History Project United States Courts The Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit District of Columbia Circuit The Honorable Harold H. Greene U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Interviews conducted by: David Epstein, Esquire April 29, June 25, and June 30, 1992 NOTE The following pages record interviews conducted on the dates indicated. The interviews were electronically recorded, and the transcription was subsequently reviewed and edited by the interviewee. The contents hereof and all literary rights pertaining hereto are governed by, and are subject to, the Oral History Agreements included herewith. © 1996 Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit. All rights reserved. PREFACE The goal of the Oral History Project of the Historical Society of the District of Columbia Circuit is to preserve the recollections of the judges who sat on the U.S. Courts of the District of Columbia Circuit, and judges’ spouses, lawyers and court staff who played important roles in the history of the Circuit. The Project began in 1991. Most interviews were conducted by volunteers who are members of the Bar of the District of Columbia. Copies of the transcripts of these interviews, a copy of the transcript on 3.5" diskette (in WordPerfect format), and additional documents as available – some of which may have been prepared in conjunction with the oral history – are housed in the Judges’ Library in the United States Courthouse, 333 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Civil Rights Act of 1957 the Civil Rights Act of 1960
    The Civil Rights Act of 1957 Image at left includes President Dwight Eisenhower (center), Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (to his right), and A. Philip Randolph (to his left) In 1957, President Eisenhower sent Congress a proposal for civil rights legislation. The result was the Civil Rights Act of 1957, the first civil rights legislation since Reconstruction. The new act established the Civil Rights Section of the Justice Department and empowered federal prosecutors to obtain court injunctions against interference with the right to vote. It also established a federal Civil Rights Commission with authority to investigate discriminatory conditions and recommend corrective measures. It was primarily a voting rights bill, but it was also a show of support for the Supreme Court's Brown decisions (1954). It eventually led to the integration of public schools. Following the 1954 Supreme Court ruling, Southern whites in Virginia began a "Massive Resistance." Violence against blacks rose there and in other states, as in Little Rock, Arkansas, where that year President Dwight D. Eisenhower had ordered in federal troops to protect nine children integrating a public school, the first time the federal government had sent troops to the South since Reconstruction. There had been continued physical assaults against suspected activists and bombings of schools and churches in the South. The administration of Eisenhower proposed legislation to protect the right to vote by African Americans. The Act was a monumental turning point, however it was weakened due to lack of support among many Democrats. The Civil Rights Act of 1960-Statement by the President Dwight D.
    [Show full text]
  • From Many to Few
    chapter one From Many to Few In one of my fi rst conversations during this research, Walter expressed excitement that someone was seriously studying Afri- can American Republicans. Walter and I initially connected because of his involvement with a local libertarian group, but he had a long history of involvement with both African American community groups and Republican political organizations. After our fi rst meeting, he insisted on taking me out to a fancy lunch at the restaurant in a private club. As we chatted over impressive club sandwiches and enjoyed an even more impres- sive view, he told me that he loved the idea that someone was taking him and other black Republicans seriously. Still, partici- pation in my research was bittersweet. He hoped the project would counter negative portrayals of African American Repub- licans, but the idea that they were worth studying because of their race and politics struck him as a problem. He couldn’t help but feel that my project was, on some level, confi rmation of his out- sider status in the public imagination. He asked fl atly, “Why is it that nobody talks about black Democrats?” 32 From Many to Few / 33 Walter’s question is a penetrating one. It calls attention to the way we automatically associate Democratic partisanship with African Americans and regard any aberrations with raised eye- brows. In his own way, Walter hints at a central issue of this research: What has to happen to make a combination of identity and politics noteworthy? Of course we talk about black Demo- crats.
    [Show full text]
  • The African American Civil Rights Movement As a Long Lasting Process of Struggle for Freedom
    Masaryk University Faculty of Education Department of English Language and Literature The African American Civil Rights Movement As a Long Lasting Process of Struggle for Freedom Bachelor Thesis Brno2008 Supervisor: Author: Mgr.ZdeněkJaník,M.A.,Ph.D. HanaMarková I declare that this bachelor thesis is completely my own work and that all informationgatheredforitscompilationiscitedinthe bibliography. Brno1stDecember,2008 HanaMarková I gratefully thank my supervisor, Mgr. Zdeněk Janík, for his kind assistance, precious advice andwith providingme the useful materials necessaryfor understanding this complicated topic. Above all, I would like to thank him for his patience and valuablecomments. HanaMarková Annotation: This thesis deals with the African American Civil Rights Movement not only from the point of view of its most important years from 1955 to1965,but alsoexplains its first part throughslavery,BlackCodes andJim Crow laws how Americansociety became divided along the color line; the second part shows how the first half of the twentiethcenturythroughthe Great Migration,the Great Depression, andbothWorld Wars contributedtothe blackself-awareness,andimprovement of their social position; inaddition the increasingsuffrage movement andthe beginningof the ColdWar along with Brown v. Board of Education laid the foundation for the spreading of the movement; the thirdpart analyses the movement itself andis dividedinto four sub-parts according to the means that movement applied – boycotts, sit-ins, freedom rides and marches; the thesis concludes
    [Show full text]
  • James D. King
    James D. King School of Politics, Public Affairs, & International Studies University of Wyoming Laramie, WY 82071 Telephone: 307-766-6239 Email: [email protected] Education Ph.D., Political Science, University of Missouri, 1983 M.A., Political Science, Western Michigan University, 1977 B.A., Social Science Teaching, Michigan State University, 1974 Academic Experience University of Wyoming, School of Politics, Public Affairs, & International Studies Professor of Political Science, 2017-present University of Wyoming, Department of Political Science Professor, 1999-2017 Department Head, 2007-2013, 2001-2004 Associate Professor, 1994-1999 Assistant Professor, 1992-1994 University of Memphis, Department of Political Science Associate Professor, 1986-1992 Department Chair, 1987-1990 Assistant Professor/Instructor, 1981-1986 Publications King, James D. In press. “Explaining and Predicting Midterm Congressional Election Outcomes: Factoring in Opposition Party Strategy.” The Forum: A Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics. King, James D. In press. “Bill Clinton, Republican Strategy, and the 1994 Elections: How a Midterm Election Became a Referendum on the President.” American Review of Politics. 1 King, James D., Andrew Garner, Jason B. McConnell, and Robert A. Schuhmann. 2020. The Equality State: Government and Politics in Wyoming 9th ed. Plymouth, MI: Hayden- McNeil (earlier editions published in 2017, 2011, 2008, 2004, 2000, 1996). King, James D., and James W. Riddlesperger, Jr. 2018. “The Trump Transition: Beginning a Distinctive Presidency.” Social Science Quarterly 99 (November): 1821-1836. King, James D. 2018. “Party Rules and Equitable Representation in U.S. Presidential Nominating Contests.” American Politics Research 46 (September): 811-833. King, James D., and James W. Riddlesperger, Jr. 2017. “The 2016-2017 Transition into the Donald J.
    [Show full text]
  • Emmett Till and the Modernization of Law Enforcement in Mississippi
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by University of San Diego San Diego Law Review Volume 46 | Issue 2 Article 6 5-1-2009 The ioleV nt Bear It Away: Emmett iT ll and the Modernization of Law Enforcement in Mississippi Anders Walker Follow this and additional works at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Anders Walker, The Violent Bear It Away: Emmett iT ll and the Modernization of Law Enforcement in Mississippi, 46 San Diego L. Rev. 459 (2009). Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol46/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital USD. It has been accepted for inclusion in San Diego Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital USD. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WALKER_FINAL_ARTICLE[1] 7/8/2009 9:00:38 AM The Violent Bear It Away: Emmett Till and the Modernization of Law Enforcement in Mississippi ANDERS WALKER* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 460 II. LESSONS FROM THE PAST ................................................................................... 464 III. RESISTING “NULLIFICATION” ............................................................................. 468 IV. M IS FOR MISSISSIPPI AND MURDER.................................................................... 473 V. CENTRALIZING LAW ENFORCEMENT .................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Rights- Supreme Court Hear Challenges to Southern Voter
    CASE NOTE CIVIL RIGHTS-SuPREmE COURT HEARS CHALLENGES TO SOUTHERN VOTER REGISTRATION SYSTEMS The Supreme Court has noted probable jurisdiction in two critical actions I brought by the United States under the Civil Rights Act of 1960 2 in an endeavor to halt two states' continued resistance to court attempts to enforce the fifteenth amendment.3 In United States v. Louisiana, 225 F. Supp. 353 (E.D. La. 1963), a three-judge district court held 4 unconstitu- tional the Louisiana provisions which require a prospective voter to inter- pret reasonably a section of the state or federal constitution if so requested by the parish registrar.5 The holding of invalidity was rested on the 'Louisiana v. United States, 377 U.S. 987 (1964) (No. 1073, 1963 Term; renum- bered No. 67, 1964 Term) ; United States v. Mississippi, 377 U.S. 988 (1964) (No. 1097, 1963 Term; renumbered No. 73, 1964 Term). The paucity of positive results from the voter registration drive in Mississippi during the summer of 1964 increases the importance of these actions. See N.Y. Times, Aug. 20, 1964, p. 13, col. 1. The extent of Southern white opposition and one of the major problems with enforcing the right to vote through county-by-county legal actions are illustrated by federal District Judge Cox's sentiments. At a hearing in which he refused to issue an injunction to speed up the registration in Canton, Mississippi, this jurist stated that he was interested in eliminating discrimination but not in whether "the registrar is going to give a registration test to a bunch of niggers on a voter drive." Watters, Negro Registration in the South, The New Republic, April 4, 1964, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • H.Doc. 108-224 Black Americans in Congress 1870-2007
    Keeping the Faith: AFRICAN AMERICANS RETURN TO CONGRESS, 1929–1970 With his election to the U.S. House of Representatives from a Chicago district in 1928, Oscar De Priest of Illinois became the first African American to serve in Congress since George White of North Carolina left office in 1901 and the first elected from a northern state. But while De Priest’s victory symbolized renewed hope for African Americans struggling to regain a foothold in national politics, it was only the beginning of an arduous journey. The election of just a dozen more African Americans to Congress over the next 30 years was stark evidence of modern America’s pervasive segregation practices. The new generation of black lawmakers embarked on a long, methodical institutional apprenticeship on Capitol Hill. Until the mid- 1940s, only one black Representative served at any given time; no more than two served simultaneously until 1955. Arriving in Washington, black Members confronted a segregated institution in a segregated capital city. Institutional racism, at turns sharply overt and cleverly subtle, provided a pivotal point for these African-American Members— influencing their agendas, legislative styles, and standing within Congress. Pioneers such as Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., of New York, Charles C. Diggs, Jr., of Michigan, and Augustus (Gus) Hawkins of Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., of New York, a charismatic and determined civil rights proponent in the U.S. House, served as a symbol of black political activism for millions of African Americans. Image courtesy of Library of Congress California participated in the civil rights debates in Congress and helped shape fundamental laws such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
    [Show full text]
  • The Art of the Possible: Everett Dirksen's Role in Civil Rights Legislation of the 1950S and 1960S
    The Art of the Possible: Everett Dirksen’s Role in Civil Rights Legislation of the 1950s and 1960s Unable to secure enfranchisement and equality for African Americans through the executive and judicial branches, civil rights proponents turned to the legislative branch in the 1950s and 1960s. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 is often criticized as a weak compromise that lacked definitive power but it was very important because it demonstrated that it was possible to pass civil rights legislation. Southern congressmen and senators prevented any legislation from passing for decades due to their domination of powerful committees and their use of the filibuster. The 1957 act showed cracks in the system. There was another civil rights act in 1960 but southern opponents restricted its scope through the use of the filibuster. Civil rights proponents in Congress learned through these experiences that if they intended to pass meaningful legislation, they had to overcome the filibuster. The tool chosen to defeat the filibuster was cloture. The Senate adopted cloture, also known as Rule 22, in 1917. It allowed sixteen or more senators to file a petition and after a set amount of debate, senators voted and if two-thirds of the members present approved it, the filibuster stopped. The rules changed in 1949 to require two-thirds of the entire Senate. Cloture was difficult to invoke because many senators felt the filibuster was the only tool they had to oppose legislation introduced by a majority. Conservatives and senators from small states were especially wary of cutting off debate. In order to achieve cloture, and ultimately meaningful civil rights legislation, supporters had to assemble bipartisan coalition for a bill.
    [Show full text]
  • Communist Party Summary Report of Recent Civil Rights Events, May 1961
    CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1960 tI ', The Civil Rights Act of 1960, a weak measure supposed "to enforce constitutional rights and for other purposes," was passed by Congress and signed by President Eisenhower, May 6, 1960. Designed principally to extend federal protection of Negro voting rights in the South, the Act has been attacked as failing even in that limited purpose. The measure provides a new device for "voting referees" supposedly to help Negroes to register in southern areas where they have been excluded from voting. When he has trouble in registering, the Negro may go to the referee and then if he can show that he meets the state's qualifications, he may be registered. This roundabout referee provision makes it harder not easier for Negroes to vote, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People charged. It calls the Act a "fraud," and its attorney, Thurgood Marshall, states, "It would take two or three years for a good lawyer to get someone registered under this bill." (N.Y. Times, April 22, 1¢0.) He said Congressional action in such "driblets" as the 1957 and 1¢D laws might serve only to hold off the needed strong measures. Other liberal and Negro groups attacked the 1960 Act on two grounds: it. did not go beyond the voting issue, and even there the remedy provided is useless. Rev. Martin Luther King, leader of the successful bus boycott in Alabama in 1955-56, speaking · before the National Urban League in New York, September 6, 1960, charged that both Democrats and Republicans were "hypocritical" on civil rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Martin Luther King's Constitution: a Legal History of the Montgomery Bus Boycott
    The Yale Law Journal Volume 98, Number 6, April 1989 Articles Martin Luther King's Constitution: A Legal History of the Montgomery Bus Boycott Randall Kennedy t I have had a little something to do with lawyers since the 1955 Montgomery bus boycott. Martin Luther King, Jr.' t Assistant Professor, Harvard Law School. Many people have generously aided me in writing this article. First, I would like to thank for his unflagging support Dean James Vorenberg. I would also like to thank Anita Allen, Scott Brewer, Archibald Cox, Charles Donohue, William Fisher, Morton Horwitz, Duncan Kennedy, Sanford Levinson, Martha Minow, Aviam Soifer, Girardeau Spann, Cass Sunstein, and David Wilkins. I presented earlier versions of this paper to the Program on Legal History at Harvard Law School and faculty colloquia at the University of Texas Law School and the Cornell Law School. I deeply appreciate the comments I received at those gatherings. 1. King, Foreword to W. KUNSTLER, DEEP IN My HEART. at xxi (1966). 1000 The Yale Law Journal [Vol. 98: 999 INTRODUCTION Martin Luther King, Jr., demonstrated a keen appreciation for both the power and the limits of law.2 The movement in which he played such a central role-the Civil Rights Movement of 1955-1968-produced, as Harry Kalven, Jr. once quipped, "the first revolution in history con- ducted, so to speak, on advice of counsel." 3 King displayed attentiveness to legal symbolism in the first speech that he gave as a civil rights leader. Urging the blacks of Montgomery, Alabama, to boycott the city's buses to protest racially-motivated mistreatment, he invoked legal and religious icons to inspire their collective defiance.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Nation Struggles to Find Its Footing: Power Struggles, 1789-1804
    Invigorated by the victory of Brown and frustrated by the lack of In preparation for sit-in’s, activist Jim Lawson teaches students The Civil Rights Era, 1954-1969 immediate practical effect, citizens rejected gradualist, legalistic tactics in passive-aggressive non-violence; specifically, in how to (Page 1 of 3) approaches as the primary tool to bring about desegregation. take the blows while responding with dignity. They were faced with "massive resistance" in the South by Sit-ins’s occur throughout south! Tactics employed by the Civil Rights Movement: proponents of racial segregation and voter suppression. Moral suasion – the strategic use of guilt to generate moral In defiance, African Americans adopted a combined 1958, Malcolm X expounds a militant philosophy, advocating for behavior strategy of direct action with nonviolent resistance. blacks to arm themselves and to act in self-defense. His speeches Litigation – the direct use of lawsuits to challenge Jim Crow routinely call the white person “devil” and are divisive. Civil disobedience – use of collective non-violent action to 1952, Cesar Chavez travels California urging Mexican Americans Civil Rights Act of 1960 disrupt state activity to registrar to vote. Signed by Eisenhower, it established federal inspection of local Economic boycott – use of collective non-violent actions to Brown v.Board of Education, 1954 voter registration polls and introduced penalties for anyone who disrupt private activity Supreme Court case ruled that segregation is schools was illegal obstructed someone's attempt to register to vote or actually vote. Grassroots organizing – rural and urban strategies to build The Act survived a 125+ hour filibuster; a calculated act of mass movement Teenager Emmitt Till murdered in Sumner Mississippi, 1955 defiance by 18 Southern Democrats who sought to delay the Solicitation of corporate sponsors – use of private vote on the bill by continuous speeches in the Senate.
    [Show full text]